Truth is life

Jesus Christ Is Lord!
17 March 2010

Tim D’Annunzio
timvote.com

Does truth mean anything? Not in politics. Not that there isn’t truth in the argument; the point is that untruth is never excluded from the argument even after it is proven to be untruth. The unethical and immoral use the lie as a tool of their trade.

AGAIN, this is why there are no solutions with these types. Their goal is the power, the position and promises of solutions are merely means of deceiving toward their desired end.

My post prior to this one ended a times of 70 weeks since the election. I have been silent for the past week hoping and praying for truth. I have found that half truth continues to reign.

Daniel 12(7), Revelation 8 & 12(14 - 17), Isaiah 65, Psalms 50

From 3 July 2009

I want to talk about the concept of “the consent of the governed.”

Before you hear me you should read, This Fourth of July, Keep Cool with Coolidge, by Julia Shaw.
It is at The Heritage Foundation’s web site at: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Thought/wm2514.cfm

The piece explains the enduring principles contained in Declaration of Independence, enduring being the key word. Calvin Coolidge, the only president born of the 4th of July, articulated the “enduring” perfectly in a speech he gave on 5 July, 1926, the 150th anniversary of our Declaration of Independence.

Coolidge’s conclusions were the same reached by all who have examined these principles with true concern for finding truth, and thereby the principles confirm themselves over and over through these confirmations and their endurance.

A process of scientific conformation of truth, if adhered to by all modern scientist, religionist, and politicians would help solve all the modern world’s problems. The world’s problems are not unsolvable; they are unsolved due to the confusion of the debate and the debate producing paralysis through improper action.

All scientific debate must be based on finding the end, the end being the truth. The debate without end is confusion. http://www.xenodochy.org/article/popper.html
I was reading about Sir Karl Popper and his Theory of Falsification. My understanding of it is that all truth seekers start with a hypothesis based on preconceived premises. These premises are then either proven or falsified by the evidence of testing. The truth seeker will/should not only look for evidence to confirm but to also disprove their hypothesis. That article above is great in understanding the process of proof of truth. If it were applied confusion would dissolve.

The problem with modern debate is that opinion is substituted for evidence, and even when evidence shows an opinion, a premise, to be false the opinions is still continually admitted as valid. The modern priority is the continuation of the debate, instead of the end, the truth.

This takes us back to motive. If you are on the side of untruth, proven untrue by evidence, then you will either admit the premise untrue, or confuse the reality of the evidence with continued debate.

That is the point of the “endurance” of the principles annunciated in the Declaration of Independence. They are proven every time they are tested objectively. It is also the reason I so strongly oppose the modern forms of religion, finance and government. They have all been proven as flawed and false, and the only way they can be perpetuated is through the same old debate and reliance on deception.

The controllers of these modern systems know these things, but they are not interested in an
end/ truth. Their priority is power and control and the only way they can keep it and further it is through continuation and perpetuation of confusion. They need the problems and the last thing they want is a solution/end/truth.

Back to, “the consent of the governed.” The Declaration says, “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” This Statement follows the statement that pronounces, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

The Declaration states, “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted.”

My premise is this: The government is only acting with “just power” if it acts with the “consent” of those being “governed” by the action. Any action by the government unequally imposed is not and cannot be just.
(Example: unequal tax rates can only be justly imposed if those being governed by the rate give consent. If you want to impose a 50% rate on the top 1% then the top 1% must consent.)
If imposed without consent then it is unjust. Imposing with only the agreement of the majority of the beneficiaries is tyranny, an alienation of the rights of those imposed upon, inequality, discriminatory and can in no way be considered consent.

What is the axiom, the first principles that are the basic of the Declaration and all other founding documents? The Ten Commandments.

Luke 10, Zechariah 8, Psalms 35, 1 Kings 18

In the name of
Jesus Christ My Lord
Thank You My Father